So Treasury Secretary Paulson was against oversight of his massive $700-billion bailout plan (i.e., his taxpayer-funded welfare scheme for his fellow Wall Street cronies)... until he was for it. Or not.
As Think Progress is reporting, Paulson told Congress today that he does in fact want oversight. In fact, the only reason he hadn't mentioned it before is that he hadn't wanted to seem "presumptuous." But, you know, oversight is "the role of Congress" and "that's something we're going to work on together. So if any of you felt that I didn't believe that we needed oversight: I believe we need oversight. We need oversight."
Thanks for the clarification.
But isn't Section 8 of the plan also pretty clear: "Review: Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."
Krugman is absolutely right about this: "[I]f Paulson can't be honest about what he himself sent to Congress -- if he not only made an incredible power grab, but is now engaged in black-is-white claims that he didn't -- there is no reason to trust him on anything related to his bailout plan."
Honestly, do you trust this man -- do you trust the Bush Administration -- with $700 billion of your money?
NO FREE BAILOUT!
No comments:
Post a Comment